Design Innovation and Technology Act of 1991: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Intellectual Property and Judicial Administration of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Second Congress, Second Session, on H.R. 1790 ... January 29, 1992U.S. Government Printing Office, 1993 - 225 lappuses |
Citi izdevumi - Skatīt visu
Bieži izmantoti vārdi un frāzes
Administrator aesthetic aftermarket air bags amendment American application auto insurance automobile automotive BAROODY benefit bill brand Bruce Lehman cars CASTLE Chairman chapter COBLE committee companies competition concern Congress consumer Consumers Union copied copyright law cost countries court crash create creativity CUNNINGHAM Design Coalition Design Innovation design legislation design patent effect exempt federal foreign function GLICKMAN going HUGHES important IMRA industrial design infringement Ingersoll-Rand Innovation and Technology intellectual property law intellectual property protection intellectual property rights issue JANUARY 29 Kanjorski knock-off Les Jackson litigation marketplace monopoly MOORHEAD Motors National NHTSA NIGP original original equipment manufacturer owner patent law percent private label problem product designs PROPERTY AND JUDICIAL proposed legislation registered design registration repair replacement retailers safety SANGMEISTER seat belt SHAROFF SILBERGELD standard SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTELLECTUAL Technology Act Thank tion trademark trucks U.S. Congress United vehicle Wal-Mart WOODRING
Populāri fragmenti
128. lappuse - It carries, of course, a right to be free from competition in the practice of the invention. But the limits of the patent are narrowly and strictly confined to the precise terms of the grant. [Citing authority.] It is the public interest which is dominant in the patent system.
142. lappuse - Doubtless a State may, in appropriate circumstances, require that goods, whether patented or unpatented, be labeled or that other precautionary steps be taken to prevent customers from being misled as to the source, just as it may protect businesses in the use of their trademarks, labels, or distinctive dress in the packaging of goods so as to prevent others, by imitating such markings, from misleading purchasers as to the source of the goods.
37. lappuse - STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD A. GEPHARDT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MISSOURI Mr. GEPHARDT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee.
185. lappuse - STATEMENT OF HON. HAMILTON FISH, JR., A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK Mr. FISH. Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen of the committee, I will be very brief.
138. lappuse - US 141, 146 (1989) (federal patent laws embody "a careful balance between the need to promote innovation and the recognition that imitation and refinement through imitation are both necessary to invention itself and the very lifeblood of a competitive economy.").
128. lappuse - The grant of a patent is the grant of a special privilege "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts." Const., Art. I, § 8. It carries, of course, a right to be free from competition in the practice of the invention. But the limits of the patent are narrowly and strictly confined to the precise terms of the grant.
112. lappuse - We have your prepared text which will be made a part of the record in full and we hope you can summarize for us.
108. lappuse - ... (g) Reproduction for Teaching or Analysis. - It is not an infringement of the exclusive rights of a design owner for a person to reproduce the design in a useful article or in any other form solely for the purpose of teaching, analyzing...
179. lappuse - original" if it is the result of the designer's creative endeavor that provides a distinguishable variation over prior work pertaining to similar articles which is more than merely trivial and has not been copied from another source. (2) A "useful article...
142. lappuse - Unfair Competition Protection Furthermore, many states prohibit unfair methods of competition, such as a vendor attempting to pass off its products as those of a better known company. ' Such state consumer protection statutes serve as a strong disincentive to the "knock-off...